"Second thing is, we're going to shove it down his throat." Don'tcha just love the BULLSHIT rhetoric

[in_cog_ni_to]

the Dems dish out? That was the Headline on May 1, 2007......

Biden: Dems will 'shove' veto down Bush's throat
The Associated Press
Posted Tuesday, May 1, 2007 at 5:58 pm
WASHINGTON (AP) — Anticipating President Bush's veto of an Iraq funding bill that would set a timeline for troops to be removed, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden told a South Carolina voter that Congress should "shove it down his throat."<snip>

<snip>
Biden, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman, made the comment Friday in South Carolina at Rep. Jim Clyburn's fish fry, a major political event for Democratic presidential candidates.

Asked by a voter what Congress will do if Bush vetoes the Democrat-backed Iraq funding bill as expected, Biden said he would move immediately to secure money for MRAPs — armored vehicles with raised, V-shaped hulls that help deflect the force of homemade bomb blasts.

"The idea that we're not building new Humvees with the V-shaped things is just crap. Kids are dying that don't have to die," Biden said, adding "Second thing is, we're going to shove it down his throat."<snip>

http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070501/NEWS/70501081

Just 21 days later? THIS headline???!


Democrats ready to cave to Bush
IRAQ | About to give up on withdrawal bill after his veto

May 22, 2007
BY ANNE FLAHERTY Associated Press
WASHINGTON---- After weeks of refusing to back down to President Bush on setting a timetable on Iraq, House Democratic leaders face having to explain to their party's rank and file why they've now relented.
Party officials said Monday the next war spending bill most likely will fund military operations and not demand a timeline to bring troops home, although it will contain other restrictions on Bush's Iraq policies.

On May 1, Bush vetoed a $124.2 billion bill that would have paid for combat in Iraq and Afghanistan through September as Bush requested, but demanded that troops start coming home this fall.

Democrats say they hope to send Bush a new bill by the end of the week he will sign, and troops in combat will get the resources they need without disruption.

''I'm frustrated'' with the war, said Rep. Joe Baca, D-Calif., a member of the Blue Dog coalition, a group of conservative Democrats. ''But we realize too we have a responsibility to fund our troops and make sure they have the right equipment.''<snip>

http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/395891,dems052207.article


WOW!!! Can you BELIEVE how those Dems shoved that bill down the psycho's throat??! Man they're tough! They scare the shit out of me....how 'bout you? Are ya shakin' in your boots yet?:scared:

:eyes: What a bunch of weasels. Do they think we're FOOLS? Don't they know we aren't a bunch of SHEEPLE like the repuke brown shirts are? I don't think they give a RATS ASS WHAT WE THINK.

[OzarkDem]

1. Talk is cheap

our Dem leaders stand for nothing but themselves. I'm not discounting all of them, but top leadership who has made a conscious choice to do nothing.

[rodeodance]

2. what a sad sad day

[Individualist]

3. They DO think we're fools, and they think we'll vote for them regardless

of what they do.

[in_cog_ni_to]

5. And THAT'S the problem. They know how important the '08 election is. They know we wouldn't chance

voting for a 3rd party candidate so they will do whatever the hell they want.

I wonder what would happen if AL GORE ran as an Independent? HE could win it. I wonder if the Dems would change their ways then? If they knew there was a TRUE threat to their power...would it matter what we think THEN? Would they finally move to the LEFT...where our party should be?

[Individualist]

8. I'm not a blind loyalist, nor are many anti-war dems

In '08 I'll write in the name of a democrat who doesn't dance to the DLC's tune.

[SammyWinstonJack]

22. How does one write in when on a touch screen voting machine?

:shrug: I'm holding out for Gore, if not him, I'm supporting Edwards. If Edwards doesn't get the nomination, I guess I will hold my nose and vote for whomever gets the Dem nom. :banghead:

[Individualist]

25. Select write-in candidate, then use the letter keyboard to enter the name

If no letter keyboard is available, I would think election officials would be required to give you a paper ballot if you request one.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

12. Primaries are wonderful things.

No glitz but a lot of activist punch.

[magellan]

7. They'd better think again.

[tavalon]

16. I'm not ditching them yet

but it is most assuredly not off of the table.

But they will hear my rage and fury. And they should hear yours too.

To believe that they can play this business as usual game is a grave error. We are as enraged as a bunch of Africanized bees and we need to shine a light on what they have done just as we do when the Republicans pull a fast one. This was wrong, is wrong and will not be made right until they put impeachment back on the table and take the war funding right back off the table. This is unacceptable and they need to know that they won't get away with it.

[opihimoimoi]

4. Are the Blue Dog Dems with us??? or are they closet Trolls?

Just asking....

[in_cog_ni_to]

10. My guess?

Trolls! IMCPO...they're right up there with Lieberman.

I remember a Roy Blunt C-SPAN interview right after the Nov. election. He said he had lunch with the Blue Dog Democrats and they told him they were planning to keep the Democrats 'under control.' Why would you want people like that in your party? What good are they doing? Have they REALLY helped the Democratic Party? I don't think so. They call themselves "fiscally responsible Democrats"....so what the fuck does being FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE have to do with not ending this illegal invasion? Why won't they support a pull out or support stopping the funds? IF they're TRULY "fiscally responsible" wouldn't they want to pull out of Iraq and save BILLIONS upon BILLIONS of dollars? The Blue Dogs make NO SENSE ....IMCPO.

[opihimoimoi]

11. I saw a pub run as a Democrat in RI...Carl Sheeler posed as a DEM

He ran against the eventual winner...WhiteHouse....but I saw first hand the blatent attempt to infiltrate the Dem Party....

"If ya can't beat um...Join um"

I think these dudes are up to no good.

[in_cog_ni_to]

13. I know. I was SO PISSED OFF when Sheeler emailed me (I STUPIDLY donated to his campaign!) the day

he decided he was going to support the REPUKE candidate, Chaffee, over Whitehouse....I shot off an email and gave that SOB a piece of my mind. Funny thing...the rat bastard hasn't been on DU lately.:grr: Yes. I forgot about Sheeler. And to think I had that asshole's bumper sticker on my car! It still pisses me off just thinking about it. That man was on DU begging for money for MONTHS and WE gave to him. What a disgusting piece of crap he is.

[opihimoimoi]

14. When he came calling for help...I asked him some questions...poor or no answers

I asked again...still very evasive...

I smelled a rat....

Sounded the warning...over the weeks, only a few smelled the same odor and heeded the warning and/or his lame excuses/weak answers....at his highest point...he had 8%....I think he was here to dilute and make mischief....

There has to be others cloaking around our Party doing the same thing...watch for them...

[Rex]

6. Okay, all I can say is we shall see.

And we all expect you to shove it down his throat. Time will tell.

[hatrack]

9. "Whatfuckingever", said Senator Biden (D - MBNA)

:puke:

[tavalon]

15. They hope to fool us

and they are going to have their asses handed to them on this one. If it is the last thing any of us does, I hope Nancy Pelosi rues the day she said impeachment was off the table. I like Madame Speaker quite a lot actually, but she screwed up bigtime then and she and her fellow invertebrates are screwing up with this too. We will not tolerate this and they are mistaken to think we will. They've ignored us thus far but they will not be able to much longer or if they do, they do it at their own political peril.

It is because I respect Madame Speaker that I will take her out to the proverbial woodshed. She is better than this.

[avrdream]

17. Reminds me of what they did to John Kerry.

Made him sound like a flip-flopper with his different decisions regarding the war. Democrats are in charge of this congress yet I see the exact same set-up happening. It will be interesting to see how the different 2008 candidates react to this.

With Biden's comments above, he already looks ineffectual.

Granted, I'm checking the news from Australia and may be missing something, but the only Democrat so far who has forcefully spoken out against this "compromise" is Russ Feingold, and he isn't even in the running.

Just what gives?

[Selatius]

18. This is why many people say Democrats stand for nothing.

They are indecisive, and because there is large ideological differences within the party, the result is a schizophrenic party. The Republican Party can at least claim to be the party of the right. Everybody else is pigeonholed into the Democratic Party, so you can imagine the amount of disagreement within the Dems.

The joke on top of that is that our election system doesn't allow more than two viable parties, so the people are left with only two choices: Continue with the schizophrenic Democrats you have now or vote Republican. Not much choice there, buddy. Sorry.

[Tesha]

19. Actually, nothing in our Congressional elections favors two parties.

> The joke on top of that is that our election system doesn't
> allow more than two viable parties,

Actually, nothing in our *CONGRESSIONAL* elections favors two
parties. Nor does anything in gubernatorial elections, nor in
State Houses.

You're just so used to hearing people say it that you implicitly
believe it. And it suits the purposes of those who say it a lot
if most of us believe it without any critical examination of
that belief.

But Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman would tell you you're wrong.

Tesha

[Selatius]

26. I beg to differ for a prime reason, mainly this:

A two-party system often develops spontaneously from the single-member district plurality voting system (SMDP), in which legislative seats are awarded to the candidate with the most total votes within his or her constituency, rather than apportioning seats to each party based on the total votes gained in the entire set of constituencies. This trend develops out of the inherent qualities of the SMDP system that discourage the development of third parties and reward the two major parties.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger%27s_law

SMDP is what we have. That is, each district is represented by only one seat. The trends favor only two viable parties. Viable, is the operative word here. Duverger's Law should not be considered to say that candidacies like Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman are impossible but that they would be rather rare in SMDP.

The frank truth of the matter is they are rare.

[Tesha]

27. Then again, from the part of the article you *DIDN'T* quote...

Counterexamples

While there are indeed many SMDP systems with two parties, there are significant counterexamples:

* India, the world's largest democracy, has multiple regional parties.
* Scotland has had until recently SMDP and similar systems, but has seen the development of several significant competing political parties.
* In the United Kingdom, many of its activists regard the Liberal Democrats, since the 2005 General Election, as forming a "third party" and creating a three-party system, but the majority of parliamentary constituencies have only two electable candidates.
* In Canada, the New Democratic Party and its predecessor the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation have had a constant presence in Parliament since the CCF's first election in 1935, and at least four political parties have been represented in the Canadian parliament at any given time since the 1993 election. In addition, the now-defunct Social Credit Party of Canada also maintained itself in Parliament nearly consistently from 1935 to 1979, often resulting in Parliaments with four national parties represented.

Duverger himself did not regard his principle as absolute: instead he suggested that SMDP would act to delay the emergence of a new political force, and would accelerate the elimination of a weakening force — PR would have the opposite effect.

Additionally, William H. Riker noted that strong regional parties can distort matters, leading to more than two parties receiving seats in the national legislature, even if there are only two parties competitive in any single district. He pointed to Canada's regional politics, as well as the U.S. presidential election of 1860, as examples of often temporary regional instability that occurs from time-to-time in otherwise stable two-party systems (Riker, 1982).

[Selatius]

28. With India and Canada, those are regional parties in action, not national ones

Bloc Quebecois is a prime example, as well as Riker's observance of regional politics in Canada. America hasn't had a regional party since the Civil War.

[Forrest Greene]

20. "Do they think we're FOOLS?"

Well, not to put too fine a point on it, but, yes.

[frylock]

21. k&r

[depakid]

23. Biden, Reid- they're both the same

Reid is especially adept at flapping his lips and then backing down- or even apologizing. The man's been a complete embarrassment in this respect.

I'm waiting now to see if he was actually serious about blocking Bush's recess appointments. If his record is any indication- that's a load of bullshit, too.

Then again, who knows, maybe he'll come through this time- though I'm not holding my breath.

[stirlingsliver]

24. K&R

This deserves to be read.